SAVING THE SUMMER. SAVING THE ECONOMY. THE PROPOSAL. Updated 16 June

Proposal letter in the FT - see below

“London we have a problem.”  The UK is now the sick man of Europe.  We have a much higher level of COVID-19 infections than most of the rest of Europe.

That means we cannot do what we want to do.  No foreign holidays this summer, in all likelihood.  No rapid recovery in the economy.  Schools closed.  Many people still trapped at home.  Unless we do something different.  This post is about a proposal to save the summer and save the economy.  Get back to some normality.

The path we are on is simply too slow.  We need to do something to accelerate the recovery and banish this coronavirus.  Catch up with other countries which have already done that substantially.


THE PATH WE ARE ON


The news today (16 June) is that two travellers from the UK have just broken New Zealand’s zero-infections record.  Which countries would now welcome British visitors without a long quarantine?  Few if any.  Millions of our summer holidays abroad potentially ruined.  Business trips tricky too.


The official UK “Alert Level” is still 4, which means “Current social distancing measures and restrictions”.  But the economic pressures mean that the lockdown is being eased as if we were at the better levels 3, 2 or even level 1.  Making a mockery of the alert level designation.

The R transmission number last published is stubbornly high at 0.7-0.9, which means the level of infections is only reducing slowly.  It also means that R could easily go over 1.0, especially in individual regions, with the risk of unleashing a painful second wave of infections.

The "COVID-19 Symptom Study app"  (ZOE) project run by King’s\ College London estimates some 159,000 people across the UK are symptomatic today, 16 June, with 4,900 new daily cases.  To which pre-symptomatic and asymptomatic cases would need to be added.  A total around 0.4% of the entire UK population    Down from last week, but further easings will put additional pressure on R.  At this rate, the level of infections in the UK will remain high throughout the summer and beyond.

The result is ongoing deaths, travel restrictions and difficulty in opening up the economy. Specifically the practical consequences are:

• With a relatively high level of infections, there will continue to be a higher number of deaths and other serious medical complications of COVID-19
• We’re living under the cloud of a second wave, and the even higher level of deaths and pain that would result
• Schools are not opening as quickly as hoped, with plans delayed by months.
• The plan to re-open pubs and restaurants has been put back from 22 June to 4 July.  But that date is not guaranteed.  Indeed looking doubtful.
• Reducing the 2 metre rule would increase the risk of transmission, and put pressure on R.  At current level of infections, that is a more significant risk than in most other European countries that have been able to reduce the rule to 1.5 or 1 metre
• People who are shielding remain in virtual house arrest.  Many others fear to leave their homes.  The economy cannot properly reopen with that low level of confidence
• Spain and other countries are opening their borders shortly, but people from the UK will be excluded.  Turning our business away for fear of importing infections.  Even UK staycation regions are giving out the same message.  Making summer holidays unlikely not only abroad but here too.
• The self-employed are worried that the SEISS is being withdrawn in August.  Furlough payments are also being reduced
• We’re jealous of other countries opening up, with New Zealand doing so with hugs and removal of any social distancing restrictions

If you are happy with that situation, then fine.  No need to read on.  But if you would prefer a better way, that allows the economy to more strongly re-open in early July, this proposal is for you.


THE BACKGROUND TO THE PROPOSAL

Let’s take 4 July as the provisional target for opening pubs, restaurants and most of the hospitality industry.  That would also allow most of the remainder of the economy to re-open too.  Plus lay the foundations for opening music and theatre venues.
. 
That would allow summer holidays to be taken here and abroad.  Save the Summer.  Save the Economy.

That means reducing the level of infections to as near zero as is possible by 4 July.  The current policies are likely to miss this by a mile.  Using straight line reductions for simplicity:


So what level of R would let the level of infections to near zero by 4 July? 

The yellow box is the answer.  This is because if we look at the following graph, we can see that with an R of 0.5. total infections are barely rising after about day 15,.  This means that new infections are nearly zero by day 15.  As it only takes a few days for someone infectious to show symptoms and self-isolate, the total level of infectious people who are not self-isolating would be near zero by around day 20, or very shortly after.

“Near zero” is a tiny fraction of whatever level of infections existed when lockdown implemented.  Zero is virtually unachievable, but the target level can be part of the modelling exercise.

Writing this post on 16 June, 4 July is 18 days away.  There needs to be time to do the modelling and make decisions.  By next Monday 22 June there will be only 14 days to 4 July.  So in practice the 4 July target needs to be adjusted to a target of 11 July.  Still saving the summer.  Still saving the economy.

By reducing R to 0.5 or lower.  How do we do that?

The first lockdown produced an R in the region of 0.4 to 0.7.  We then saw a rapid reduction in infections.  The reduction rate has slowed recently because R has been allowed to rise.

Any delay in implementing a second lockdown would likely put back the target date, subject to the conditions of the lockdown. The more delay, the harsher the lockdown or the later the July re-opening.


THE PROPOSAL

Unfortunately we don’t yet have a reliable set of anti-transmission techniques that can immediately substitute for a lockdown.  People need to be trained and be supplied with any equipment such as face coverings.  We can’t afford that delay to achieve anything near the 4 July target for near-zero infections that would allow much of normal life to resume.

The proposal in the letter published in the Financial Times last week (right), when a 4 July target was feasible, is in two parts:

• Immediately reduce R to 0.5 by a second lockdown  Indeed aim for an R of 0.4.
• Implement a better set of anti-transmission techniques to keep infections low on an ongoing basis

As things stand, a second wave of infections is still a possibility, indeed likely.  That would necessitate a second lockdown.  As we learnt from the first lockdown, the earlier this is done the better.   So arguably we should lockdown again now

But in any case, locking down again by 22 June would let us achieve an early July target and thereby save the summer and the economy.  Plus virtually eliminate the risk of a second wave..


WHAT WOULD THE SECOND LOCKDOWN LOOK LIKE?

This is a matter for the modellers and political decisions.  As a starting point, target an R of 0.4 by going back to a similar lockdown to that in March, but retaining as much of the subsequent easings as is possible.

For businesses and other organisations, this might be:

• Go back to essential businesses only.  Other businesses would only have to become closed for 3 weeks, and then find it easier to re-open, such as eliminating the 2m limit
• But as outdoors is safer than indoors, maybe retain outdoor businesses such as theme parks and garden centres
• Maybe even allow outdoor cafes and pub gardens to re-open.  That would be a useful ‘sweetener’ for the hospitality sector and the public

For individuals, we need a set of restrictions that people would support in pursuit of the 4 July target.  Ideally voluntary so there is the essential ongoing commitment beyond then.  This might be:

• Retain compulsory wearing of face coverings on public transport, and potentially extend this to shops
• Go back to the simple “Stay at home” message, with one daily exercise and essential shopping
• But preferably retain the new ‘bubbles’ concept
• Potentially reduce the 6 people outdoors limit
• Retain the 2 metre social distancing, with carrot of reducing to 1m or less in early July

WHAT WOULD THE ANTI-TRANSMISSION TECHNIQUES LOOK LIKE?

Transmission occurs by two principal methods:

• Through the air.  Face coverings (otherwise known as 'Simple Source Control masks') are an important way to reduce this risk, as countries in South East Asia have found

• Via surfaces such as worktops, door handles and pet fur.  This can be reduced by avoiding touching the face, avoiding touching surfaces with fingertips, and regular hand washing with soap to destroy the virus’s fatty covering

Note that there are products now being sold as “Masks” or “Medical masks” that protect against bacteria but not the smaller viruses.  These only count as Simple Source Control (SSC) face coverings.  The motto is “My mask protects you, yours protects me”.  But the protection is not as good as self-isolation or current social distancing regulations, so these must be fundamentally maintained.

The actual list of techniques needs to be beefed up over the next three weeks, implanting as many as possible in the meantime.  This needs to be accompanied by a crystal clear training programme for the general public.

The government should also seriously consider providing materials such as SSC masks to everyone free of charge.  This is what is happening to a greater or lesser extent elsewhere in the world.  A far lower cost to the Treasury than the hit to the economy that can be avoided.  A sensible investment.


BUT ARE YOU SCEPTICAL?

Are you convinced that we've got a problem in the UK?  And that a second lockdown would solve it? If you are unsure, please read the post above again.

Then there are two major hurdles to implement a second lockdown:

1. The public’s willingness to do it
2. The political will to do it

There would need to be a major PR and education exercise to explain the benefits of a second lockdown and what the public would have to do to achieve the early July target.  Ideally obtain their voluntary commitment so R can be kept low after removing the lockdown.  Far better PR than we’ve seen so far.  Nonetheless achievable.

On that basis, a sufficient proportion of the public should be willing to lockdown for the short period and follow government guidance voluntarily.

Provided there is the political will.  This is discussed separately here.


CONCLUSION

The proposal for a second shorter lockdown would allow for a far stronger easing of the economy in July, allow people to go on holiday in the summer, and make it far safer for people who have been shielding to leave their homes.  Save the Summer.  Save the Economy.  Get back to some normality.

Given the benefits, shouldn't this option for a second lockdown be seriously considered?